Pleasant Law Blog (Insurance Claims, Medical Misakes, and Nursing Home Claims)

$1.68 Million Verdict for Correction Officer in California

The December 2007 Law Reporter (Published by the American Association for Justice) outlines the details of a recent disability discrimination case filed by a County Juvenile Detention Facility worker who was awarded $1.68 million in damages related to her employer’s failure to accommodate her wrist disability.  The plaintiff, who had been earning about $43,200.00 per year, came away with damages that high probably for a number of reasons.  First, in employment law cases, future expected income can often be substantial.  In this case, the plaintiff’s future expected lost income was $360,000.00.  Also in employment law cases, generally the plaintiff is able to recover past lost income as of the time of trial; and in this particular case that amount was $69,000.00.  This plaintiff also had lost her health insurance benefits, which were apparently substantial.  Most importantly, probably, were emotional distress damages related to the case.  The employer in this case repeatedly over a number of years failed to accommodate this employee’s disability, which aggravated the injury due to the job duties required.  The worst part, however, is that the employer finally terminated the plaintiff while the plaintiff was on leave for treatment of a breast cancer condition, and only after plaintiff finally complained about her employer’s failure to accommodate her wrist disability.  Most federal employment law protections for employees also contain “anti-retaliation” provisions.  In many cases, even if the employer has not violated the statute itself (e.g., by actually discriminating in violation of the law), but the employer terminates an employee for complaining or “blowing the whistle”,  then the employer is liable for retaliation if it takes any adverse employment action against the employee.  These seem to be some of the best employment law cases.  These retaliation provisions are important to the enforcement of employment law protections for employees and to protecting employees’ rights under the law.  The jury’s verdict in this case demonstrates the importance of employees being able to report or complain about what is perceived to be discriminatory treatment.  Employment law retaliation provisions also pave the way for employees to work with employers to ensure fairness under those laws.